
The Samaritan Pentateuch 



BsfiCXW*?- ACAStt-'W rr?*&*$/yti < x&rt* 



WILLIAM. E. BARTON 




f 







JACOB, SON OF AARON, HIGH PRIEST OF THE SAMARITANS AT SHECHEM. 



THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH: 

THE STORY OF 

A SURVIVAL 
AMONG THE SECTS. 

BY WILLIAM E. BARTON, D. D. 



AUTHOR OF "THE OLD WORLD IN THE NEW CENTURY," "THE 

PSALMS AND THEIR STORY," " JESUS OF NAZARETH : 

THE STORY OF HIS LIFE, AND THE SCENES 

OF HIS MINISTRY," ETC. 



( Published in the Bibliotheca Sacra for October, 1903, 
and reprinted by the courtesy of its Editor.) 



OBERLIN, OHIO : 

THE BIBLIOTHECA SACRA COMPACT?.. 

1903. 



r 7/* 



crVC 

AUTOGRAPH BETTER IN ARABIC OF JACOB THE HIGH PRIEST. 



AuthoP. 
JF'04 



THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH 



BY THE) RRVKRKND WHJJAM E. BARTON, D.D. 

For several years prior to my tour of Palestine in 1902, 
I had noted with interest the accounts, in books on bibli- 
cal antiquities, of the Holy Scroll at Nablus. This man- 
uscript, containing the Pentateuch, is believed to be the 
oldest manuscript in existence of any portion of the Bible. 
As the priests show it with great reluctance, and are sup- 
posed to exhibit it, even to their own people, only once a 
year, on the Day of Atonement, I was anxious that they 
should not substitute for it, at the time of my visit, the 
more recent parchment which on ordinary occasions they 
display. My friend, Mr. B. K. Warren, chairman of the 
World's Sunday-school Convention Committee of Arrange- 
ments, had visited Palestine the year before, and had seen 
the ancient scroll. He gave me a letter of introduction to 
the High Priest, written on his business letter-head, which 
rather formidable-looking document I found of service on 
my arrival in Nablus. As my visit opened ' interesting 
personal relations with the High Priest, and has led me to 
some subsequent study of the Samaritans and of their Pen- 
tateuch, I shall give somewhat in detail an account of this 
interesting people, and of the contribution which their ver- 



6 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

sion of the Pentateuch may afford to our knowledge of the 
Old Testament. I am the more confident of the timeli- 
ness of such an article, because recent books on textual 
criticism indicate a revival of interest in the Samaritan 

** to?" n./VXj'*frU?./*>r\?M^-?* *-* s .&*:£ 
•^ **e&n <&C"K? -i\*--W /VA* -A** /0£\t% 

2~wij£! *<2&>«>*xirtt&£2&*in?ix**<2> 

**>+&■**&&■ A/evJfrV'S* ••KrrjtW>*X$*XW'-- 

«*"&'* A'A* •• * wt9**-t*2*p -j&fjfaZ 

u ' *\jfcJ«S{ /v>* e^MSffc: -\?i- n?.*" ^7/V- 5|*^,V^i 

I.EAF FROM OU) SAMARITAN MANUSCRIPT. 

version, and also because popular interest has lately been 
turned to the discovery of an old Samaritan Pentateuch in 
Damascus, which is said to have been written in 735 a.d. 
This manuscript is reported to be now in Cairo. I have 
recently learned that one of the younger priests of the Sa- 
maritan synagogue was imprisoned by the High Priest 
some months ago, on the suspicion of having stolen and 
sold an ancient manuscript from the synagogue there. 
Some people in Syria believe this newly-discovered Penta- 
teuch to be the missing codex. This manuscript, if genu- 
ine in its date, would be several hundred years earlier than 
the oldest Old Testament manuscript in the British Muse- 
um ; but it is still quite modern as compared with the 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 7 

Holy Scroll of Nablus, which the Samaritans declare was 
written by the grandson of Aaron, and modern scholars 
believe must be nearly as old as the Christian era. 

The Samaritan sect has never been large or widely scat- 
tered. Two hundred years ago there were colonies in Da- 
mascus, Cairo, and Gaza ; but all these are now extinct, 
and there remains but one community, and that, fortunate- 
ly, the ancient one at Nablus. 

Nablus, corrupted from Neapolis, occupies the site of 
ancient Shechem, and is the chief city of Central Palestine. 
Situated in a beautiful and well -watered valley, between 
Mounts Bbal and Gerizim, with Jacob's well near at hand, 
it is the most fertile and one of the most interesting spots 
in Palestine. Here is found the one remaining colony of 
the sect founded by Sanballat and his son-in-law Manas- 
seh, living under the shadow of the mountain where they 
built their synagogue soon after 432 B.C. There are about 
one hundred and sixty-five of them now, and their num- 
bers are practically stationary. They lack marriageable 
young women, and will not marry out of their own sect. 
They are very poor, and could hardly live but for the fees 
of the tourists. 

We arrived at the outskirts of Nablus at the close of an 
afternoon in March, and, leaving our horses to be conduct- 
ed to camp by muleteers, went on foot through the narrow 
and tortuous and often overarched streets of the city to 
the Samaritan community, that is situated at the upper 
end of Nablus, at the foot of Mount Gerizim. The syna- 
gogue is the principal point of interest; and within the 
synagogue, which is plain and bare, the Holy Scroll is al- 
most the only article of value. Both this and the substi- 
tute were exhibited to our company, the largest in recent 
years. 

The High Priest Jacob stood beside the ancient roll, 
showing it with solemn pride. He calls himself, in an au- 



8 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

tograph in my possession and written in old Hebrew and 
Arabic, "Jacob, the son of Aaron, priest of Shechem." He 
is a man a little above middle life, dark, dignified, and 
tall. His greeting was cordial. I presented my letter, 
but I could not make the priests understand from whom 
the letter had come, as they were unable to read it. Its 
lithographed heading, however, impressed them, and they 
treated me as became my probable right as a person intro- 
duced by some one whom they ought to remember, and 
who used a large and official-looking letter-head. It is al- 
together likely that they treated me with as great consid- 
eration as they would have done if they had been able to 
identify me. 

Our company so rilled the synagogue that I could not 
examine minutely the two old copies, but my impression 
confirms Conder's description of the case of the newer one 
as being of brass, with thin, silver arabesques. The older 
one seemed to be of solid silver, and the manuscript is 
very old, yellow, torn, and patched. The ink is much 
faded, 1 and is said to be of a purplish cast, as contrasted 
with the very black ink of all the other manuscripts. 2 At 
the close of my second purchase next day, I procured, as a 
premium, a small fragment of a very old manuscript, 
whose ink is so faded that one could hardly discern the 
color, save that on the back it has stained a distinct pur- 
plish hue. I could not understand the claim of antiquity 
which the priest made for it, but think he affirmed that it 
belonged to the most ancient scroll. I have no suspicion 
that the Samaritans would mutilate that holiest of manu- 
scripts for money ; but if I knew that, in the undoubted 

1 "The handwriting is small and rather irregular; the lines far apart; 
the ink is faded and of a purplish hue; the parchment much torn, very 
yellow, and patched in places, and bound at the edges with green silk " 
(Conder, Tent Iyife in Palestine, p. 26). 

2 " The ink is black in all cases save the scroll at Nablus" (Deutsch 
Remains, p. 407). 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 9 

repairings of the old one, some tattered bits like this had 
been cast aside in the process of restoration, I should be 
willing to be convinced that I have one of them. The 
manifest antiquity, the fact that it has long since been worn 
out of its place, — there is no new tear on any portion of its 
edge, — the yellow color of the parchment, the irregular 
lines as contrasted with the ordinary ruled lines, and the 
purple ink, make this not at all impossible. 

The Samaritans believe that this oldest of their manu- 
scripts, and the original from which all their later copies 
have been derived, was made by Abishua, son of Eleazar, 
son of Aaron, a dozen years after the first crossing of the 
Jordan. They declare that it contains a cipher, made by 
the thickening of the stems of letters down the middle of 
the manuscript, giving the name of the writer and the date 
of the writing. This same inscription, however, is copied 
in other of the manuscripts, and thus reduces to a common 
level of incredibility what is of itself incredible. But it is 
doubtless many centuries older than any other known man- 
uscript of any part of the Bible. It is altogether likely 
that it covers more than half the twenty-five hundred years 
that carry us back to the rupture between the Jews and the 
Samaritans. It is, indeed, a most venerable document, 
and is regarded by the Samaritans with almost supersti- 
tious reverence. It is written on the hair side of skins, 
said to have been the skins of rams offered in sacrifice. 
Conder and others say that it contains the skins of "about 
twenty rams." But, as it was not unrolled for Conder, 
this is a pure guess; and I am sure, judging from a copy 
of the Torah of the same width which I bought at Jerusa- 
lem, that there are not less than fifty-two of them. The 
leather is backed with other parchment, covered with in- 
scriptions from the Law in larger letters. The width of 
the parchment is about sixteen inches, and it is wound on 
two rollers surmounted by large metal knobs, and the 



io The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

whole is inclosed in a cylindrical case of silver, double- 
hinged at the back, so that it may be closed or opened at 
will, and the manuscript rolled either way, exposing, when 
the roll is open, a column at a time. The skins are sewed 
together, end to end, and must make the roll at least a hun- 
dred feet long. 

A young priest, a son of Jacob the High Priest, gave me 
his personal attention, and brought me to where another 
attendant was selling little tin cases in facsimile of the 
great roll, each containing a small roll of paper with Sa- 
maritan characters on it. I was about to buy one of these, 
when, finding it to be the last on hand, and one of the la- 
dies desiring it, I let her have it, and indicated to the priest 
that I greatly desired one for myself. He made some ef- 
fort to find one, but apparently our large company had 
bought out the stock. There were none to be had. How- 
ever, he brightened with sudden animation, and at the 
same time assumed an air of mystery. Taking me through 
the court into the connecting court of the High Priest's 
house, he led me up an outer stair into an upper room. 
Here he produced a scroll, and offered it to me, but had 
scarcely begun when the door burst open and the women 
of the household entered, protesting vigorously against 
what they supposed him to be about to do. He drove 
them out, shut the door behind them, and barred it. Then 
he and I began negotiations for the scroll containing a 
modern copy of the Pentateuch, inclosed in a tin case, the 
crude facsimile of the silver case below. 

The book was written on hand-made paper about six- 
teen inches wide. The sheets sewed together made a 
scroll a hundred and six feet long. It is ruled with blind 
lines, fifty-four to the column, and contains two hundred 
and thirty columns. It begins with no heading, but has a 
colophon with a little scrollwork in red ink at the end, the 
colophon reading, "The Perfect Torah; Blessed be Jeho- 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. n 

vah, who gave it." 1 The breaks between the five books 
are indicated by four lines of blank paper. The lines are 
ruled like the Jewish manuscripts, but not with ink. It 
was somewhat worn by use, and in one place had been 
worn in two. A good many corrections appeared in it, and 
in one or two places it had been patched by pasting a new 
piece over an error. It was these things that gave me as- 
surance of its genuineness, for I could not read it. Had it 
been entirely new, I could have had no assurance that I 
was not buying a book made to sell to tourists. But the 
book was evidently one in present use in the synagogue. 
It showed the work of several different scribes in its differ- 
ent parts. It was not badly soiled, and seemed to me al- 
together desirable. 

The price demanded, however, was larger than at the 
time I felt like paying, and our negotiations proceeded 
slowly. My companion talked very few words of English. 
He knew the value of an English pound, or "bun" as he 
called it, and this was his unit of value. When we failed 
to come to terms, he drew from under the bed in the room 
a copy of Genesis. It was newer than the other, with wider 
columns, and the lines were less regular and not ruled. 

At length, and after all my companions had left the 
synagogue and returned to the camp outside the city, I 
came to terms with the priest. I was to have the second 
roll, Genesis, which I identified by our agreement on the 
name " B'reshith," and the case in which the larger roll 
had first been displayed. But he indicated that I must not 
be seen leaving with it in my arms. Wherefore the priest 
put it under his robe, took me into one of the overarched 
tunnels which abound in Nablus, and there delivered the 
book. 

1 The last words are indistinct, and this may not be the correct trans- 
lation; but the first part is plain,— "The Perfect [i.e. complete] Torah; 
Blessed be Jehovah." 



12 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

With some difficulty I found my way through the 
strange, dark, narrow streets in the growing darkness, and 
returned to camp. Next morning I was glad to meet an- 
other of the priests, who came at five o'clock, bearing the 
roll which I had first been shown, and offered it to me for 
a less sum than at first he had asked. At length we agreed 
upon a price, and I wrapped the manuscript in cloth and 
brought it to Jerusalem, and from there conveyed it home. 
In addition to this and the book of Genesis, I bought a lit- 
tle volume containing the story of Joseph ; a leaf of an 
older manuscript containing Numbers xxvi. 19-xxvii. 15, 
in very nicely-formed, bold letters ; and the scrap of a 
very old and tattered parchment, evidently a fragment of 
a synagogue roll, With ancient writing (Gen. xxvi. 20-22) 
on one side, and modern writing on the other. It is this 
which I count possibly a fragment of the Sacred Scroll it- 
self, because of its antiquity, its color, the irregularity of 
its lines, and its purple ink. 

This apparent mystery in the sale of their manuscripts 
is almost wholly pretended. There was a time when no 
money would buy from the Samaritans a copy of their 
Torah. Dr. Robinson tells in his " Researches " * of his 
repeated efforts to buy a copy, and of his failure. Now, 
however, they are quite willing to sell their more recent 
manuscripts, or to make them to order. 

1 " They professed to have about a hundred manuscripts, and the priest 
said that he employs himself in writing out copies of the law. When 
asked if they would sell a copy, the answer was: ' Yes, for fifty thou- 
sand piastres' " (Vol. ii. pp. 281-282, a.d. 1838). This, of course, was a 
refusal, as the sum named was to them an immense one. 

" The priest offered to dictate a translation of this latter [commentary] 
in Arabic to Yacob, to be written down by him for Dr. Smith at an ex- 
pense of about three hundred and seventy-five piastres. But he would 
not (or did not) consent to part with a copy of the original at any price, 
saying that it was against their religion that any book in the sacred lan- 
guage and characters should go into the hands of strangers and foreign- 
ers. Perhaps the time will come when the offer of a high price will re- 
move their scruples" (Vol. iii. p. 130, a.d. 1852). 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 13 

The manuscript which I procured is, of course, entirely 
modern, but it has some interesting characteristics as com- 
pared with Kennicott's list of Samaritan manuscripts in 
European libraries. These various manuscripts were for 
the most part secured elsewhere than at Nablus, and from 
private parties. Without exception they are in book 
form. Most of them are incomplete, and many of them 
are very fragmentary. My own is a scroll, entirely com- 
plete, and has been corrected, pasted, and revised, and is 
of the same width as the ancient one ; it was made in the 
synagogue at Nablus, by the priests, and doubtless was 
copied from, and compared with, their older manuscripts. 
It has been actually used in the synagogue worship, which 
is probably not true of any one of the manuscripts in Eu- 
ropean libraries to which reference has been made. 

Returning to America, I was fortunate in receiving a 
visit from my friend, Rev. Frank H. Foster, D.D., who 
spent some weeks with me, and who offered to assist me in 
reading my purchases. To him I am greatly indebted for 
the assistance which makes this article possible. We found 
the book written in a language practically identical with 
the Hebrew, but in an alphabet much older ; being, in- 
deed, an independent development of the ancient Hebrew. 
We found an alphabet in McClintock and Strong's Cyclo- 
pedia, our only other apparatus being a Hebrew Bible and 
lexicon, and these were quite sufficient. Dr. Foster began 
by transliterating into Hebrew, but in a short time was 
able to read readily without transliteration, and with such 
facility as readily to correct minor errors made in copying. 
To illustrate the unlikeness of alphabets, I may say that I 
had replaced the manuscript in the case, judging which 
side up it ought to go by the letter shtn, which I thought 
I recognized. But instead of this largest of modern He- 
brew letters, it proved to be yodh, smallest of them, and to 
belong the other side up. 



14 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

The smaller roll, containing Genesis, proved to be in- 
complete, and I opened correspondence with the High 
Priest through Dr. Wright of the Church Mission Society 
Hospital at Nablus. The High Priest has supplied the 
missing chapters, and the book is now entire. I have also 
procured the book of Exodus in four small volumes. I 
am now negotiating for other manuscripts through other 
friends in Palestine, as Dr. Wright has been called to Eng- 
land. Just before his return, however, he forwarded to 
me this interesting letter in Arabic, with the translation 
made at the Mission : — 

"Nabujs, 25th April, 1903. 
"My Dear Friend Mr. William, may God guard his existence, Amen. 

" With great pleasure I received your letter sent me through Dr. 
Wright. I was glad to read it and was delighted with your good friend- 
ship. You made me know that the roll on which the book of Genesis 
was written by my son, was wanting three chapters; we have already 
written them. 

"Further you ask about the books that are found with us, so I have 
made a list of the books found with us; you may look it over and let us 
know which you like and through the aforesaid [Dr. Wright] we will 
send whatever you want. He bought for you the book of Exodus in four 
parts complete and paid us the price. 

1 • In regard to your question about our faith in Christ, we say that he 
is yet to come. The dealings of the European Christians are very good. 
May I ask for your photograph to remain with us as a reminder of you. 

' ' Nothing more to say but to send my salaams to every one belonging 
to you. Jacob [son] of Aaron, 

"Samaritan High Priest, in Nablus." 

• I am glad to extend, to readers of this article, this greet- 
ing from the present head of this ancient sect, that has 
maintained the celebration of the Passover and other Old 
Testament observances, almost without interruption, and 
in one spot, for twenty-three centuries. 

Three times a year, — at the feasts of unleavened bread, 
of weeks, and of tabernacles, — they make a pilgrimage to 
their holy mountain, Gerizim, and there, at the time of 
the Passover, they offer sacrifices. They are rigid mono- 
theists, and they look for the coming of the Messiah in a 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 15 

little more than a century, when, according to their com- 
putation, the world will be six thousand years old. The 
Messiah, as they believe, will be like unto Moses, but will 
not be greater than Moses. 

The Samaritan religion as an independent system of 
worship has existed since 432 B.C., and had its origin in 
the opposition that arose against Nehemiah's attempt to 
divorce the priests who had married foreign women. One 
of these priests, Manasseh, son-in-law of Sanballat, the 
neighboring governor of Shechem, established the faith 
which has continued in that same spot from that day to 
this. It was the worship of Jehovah on the basis of the 
Pentateuch alone, and with the claim that Gerizim ante- 
dated Jerusalem, and was the one lawful place of worship. 
Jerusalem has been captured and recaptured, and its faith 
has changed from Jewish to Christian and from Christian 
to Mohammedan, but the faith of the founders of the Sa- 
maritan religion continues without change of location or 
essential change of form. 

Besides their periodic celebrations on the mountain, they 
observe regular worship, and maintain a school, in their 
synagogue in the city. They are glad to add to their 
slender revenues from tithes the small fees, generally a 
franc each, which tourists leave in exchange for a sup- 
posed sight of their ancient manuscript. 

Their relations with the missionaries are friendly, and I 
have no reason to suppose their expressions of good-will to 
Christians are otherwise than sincere. 

The High Priest has written for me a "list of the books 
that are found with us," which has value as a contribution 
toward a Bibliography of the Samaritan Religion. This 
has been translated for me by Prof. J. R. Jewett, of Chi- 
cago University, whose courtesy I gratefully acknowledge, 
and I have compared it with Professor Pick's list in McClin- 
tock and Strong, whose articles there and in the Bibuo- 



j 5 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

theca Sacra constitute the most valuable work accessi- 
ble in English on these subjects. I have added a few 
notes to Professor Jewett's translation, as the result of this 
comparison. It will appear, however, that each list con- 
tains some titles not in the other. Prof. Milton S. Terry, 
of Northwestern University, has looked over the notes, 
and given me the benefit of his judgment in the matter. 

1. Book of the Roll of the Law; that is, the five books of Moses only. 

2. Kitab el-Memyar, known as Maymar Marka (The Sayings of Ma- 
raka), embracing spiritual sciences dealing with the precious things of 
the sacred law. An ancient composition dating from somewhat more 
than two hundred years after the Messiah, as is made clear in th ecom- 
mentary on the Tolideh. And he was the most learned of the learned 
men of our nation (sect). It contains 663 pages. Translated into Ara- 
bic with Hebrew (i.e. Samaritan) text, and explained in Arabic — com- 
plete. 

NOTE. —Professor Pick gives the date about 50 B.C. It gives a com- 
mentary on portions of the Law. 

3. Kitab it tabach (Book of Sacrifice). By Sheikh Abul Hasan of 
Tyre. Ancient Arabic, with Hebrew evidential examples. Containing 
precious instructions relating to Samaritan religious matters, and the 
solving of doubtful signs (questions), and the distinguishing of what is 
permitted from what is forbidden in any matter whatsoever. Number of 
pages, 300. 

4. Kitab al-Kafi (the sufficient). By Sheikh Yusuf il-Askari. An- 
cient. Contains instructions and inquiries about everything in the Sa- 
maritan religion. The number of pages in this book is 270. Arabic, 
with Hebrew evidential examples. 

NoTE. — Pick gives the date of this document as 700 a.d. 

5. Commentary on the Fatiha. By Sheikh Ibrahim il-Kabasi. Three 
hundred and fifty-one years old. Number of pages, 200. 

NoTE.— A book explaining the blessings and cursings of the Law. 
The name Fatiha is usually given to the first Sura of the Koran. 

6. The Book of the Journey of the Heart to the Knowledge of the 
Lord (whose name is exalted). It also has .... May God be merciful to 
him. And in it are a number of commands and injunctions of the Law. 
Arabic with Hebrew evidential examples. Number of pages, 200. 

7. Book of the Commentary of the First Book, i.e. Bresit (Genesis). 
Of the composition of Sheikh Musalim Al Mar j an id-Deuafi. Contains 
a solution of the enigmas and difficulties of this Book. Contains 860 

pages. 

NOTE. — This commentary, which covers the entire book of Genesis, 
dates from the eighteenth century, according to Pick. Pick notes also 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. ij 

an older commentary on Genesis i.-xxvii., dating from the second cent- 
ury A.D. 

8. Book of the Commentary of the Second Book, i.e. Book of Shenot 
(Exodus). Composition of Sheikh Ghazali 'd Dwaik. 805 pages. 

9. The History of our Community from the Day the Samaritans en- 
tered the Holy L,and to the Present Day. Collected by Jacob, present 
High Priest. In Arabic. Number of pages, 807. 

10. The Book et-Tolideh, in Hebrew, with a number of important 
events given with their dates. Pages, 120. 

11. A book containing ten chapters, from which may be learned the 
rites of the Samaritan religion, and what is their procedure in their 
prayers in every feast and festival, and what is their marriage, and what 
their divorce and their fasting, and the knowing of the clean from the 
unclean, and readings for the day of atonement. With readings from 
the Law. By the one indicated [i.e. the present High Priest], as was 
asked of us by one of the scholars of Europe, who did not take it, owing 
to his death before its completion. Contains 370 pages. 

12. Book of Prayer, of ancient composition, said by Marka and Am- 
ram and the Priest Phinehas, and some of the prayers derived from 
Joshua the son of Nun. In Arabic writing. Contains 360 pages. 

13. A Torah explained, i.e. translated into Arabic. Two parts, Ara- 
bic and Hebrew. Contains 620 pages. 

14. A book of the orders of the prayers of the Sabbath of the celebra- 
tion of the feast of the unleavened bread, and the night of the beginning 
and the day of the beginning, i.e. of the year, and the prayers of the 
night of the beginning of the month when it corresponds with the Sab- 
bath, with all the proper words and ritual (sayings). By a number of 
well-known scholars. Number of pages, 250. 

15. The book of the orders of prayer for fourteen days of Moed Aph- 
sah morning and evening, and the prayers of the two Sabbaths which are 
in them and their orders. Contains 175 pages. 

NoTE. — This is the feast of Unleavened Bread, which the Samaritans 
celebrate for two weeks. The distinction between this feast and the 
Passover is more marked among the Samaritans than among the Jews. 

16. The book of the order of the prayers of the Feast of the Passover 
and its nights and its days, and the orders of prayer for the seven days 
of the unleavened bread and their Sabbaths, and ail that concerns the 
sacrifice. Kiburim of the Passover in general and in particular. Con- 
tains 420 pages. 

17. The order of the prayers of the fifty days, i.e. the Weeks, and all 
the orders of those weeks with their different arrangements. Number 
of pages, 220. 

18. Book of the orders of prayers for the Wednesday, known as the 
Wednesday of Pentecost, and the Sabbath, with all their orders. Con- 
tains 340 pages. 



1 8 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

19. Book of the orders of prayers of celebration of fast, i.e. the meet- 
ing of Moses and Haron, with the prayers of the night of Reosh-Ashena 
and its day, and the ten days of Hassalihu (?) evening and morning. Con- 
tains 300 pages. 

Note. — Reosh-Ashena is the feast of the beginning of the year. 

20. The order of prayers of the night of the great feast and its day 
and its ritual (lit. sayings), and all the rites attached to it. Contains 650 
pages. 

21. Order of the prayers of the seven days of the Feast of Taberna- 
cles and the eighth day of that feast, and the order of the Sabbath which 
falls in them. Pages, 240. 

22. The Book on the Commentary on the Ten Commandments. Old. 
Composition of Abul-Hasm of Tyre. Arabic. Pages, 80. 

23. Book of the Questions as to the Difference. By the Sheikh Men- 
ja. Eloquent language as to the matter of the Samaritan religion; and 
a reply to the Jews, and the debate between this Sheikh and the Sheikh 
el-Fajyami, the Jewish Rabbi. Number of pages, 240. 

NOTE. ■— Menaji Naphes el-Din, the author of this controversial work, 
lived in the twelfth century. 

24. Modern Hebrew book, giving information as to the birth of Mo- 
ses, and what happened by his hand, and what helped him with the 
Egyptians, and praises about him. By the late Kazar, the priest. 120 
pages. 

25. A modern Arabic book, by Sheikh Istnial is-Rashi, May God 
have mercy on him. 120 pages. 

26. The Book of Joshua, and Commentary upon it. Also the story 
of Balaam and the story of the second kingdom. Ancient composition. 
150 pages. 

NOTE. — This book has been known to scholars since 1584, when a 
copy was procured in Cairo. It is, excepting the Torah, the most valua- 
ble of the Samaritan books. 

27. Book of the feast for the congregation of Israel, by various Sa- 
maritan scholars and Sheikhs. 150 pages. 

28. Book of Joy (?) By a certain scholar. A collection of various 
materials. Pages 200. 

NOTE. — This is possibly the treatise on Marriage mentioned in some 
bibliographies, written in the twelfth century by Abul-Barakat. 

29. Book by an unknown author, ancient. Contains many things, 
Number of pages, 300. 

NoTE. — This book, whose title is not clear, may be the historical ex- 
position of the Law, showing how the ancients observed it. By F4- 
hhabr Jacob, in the twelfth century. 

30. Book of Wills and Testaments. Contains 200 pages. 

NOTE. — This book was written by Abul-Barakat, in the twelfth cent- 
ury, who also wrote a book on marriage, which may be Number 28 
above. 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 19 

I am confident that the knowledge that these manu- 
scripts are now obtainable will be welcome news to many 
scholars and friends of libraries. In recent years there has 
been little effort to procure them. While European li- 
braries now contain more than the sixteen manuscripts — 
mostly incomplete — referred to in ordinary reference-books, 
the additions are neither numerous nor notable, and the 
number in America is very small. Drew Theological 
Seminary has one ; a valuable codex procured by Rev. W. 
Scott Watson in 1892 is now owned by the New York 
Public library; 1 and Mr. Watson has since procured an- 
other which he believes a very ancient one. 2 Every large 
public library and every theological library might well 
aspire to own one. 3 

It is a very interesting fact that the Samaritans accept 
the five books of Moses, and these only. When they broke 
away from the Jews, they took the books that at that time 
were most highly esteemed in Palestine. They did not 
take any of the prophets, though some of these men were 
from their own tribes ; nor did they take the book of 
Joshua, though they could well have used it, and did in- 
deed make up a sort of sequel, of which Joshua is the hero, 
to the story of the wilderness wanderings, which book of 
Joshua, however, they never admitted to their canon. 
This fact raises two very interesting questions. Had the 
Jews at 432 B.C. so far agreed upon the canonicity of their 
prophets that any other canon than the Torah was then 
generally recognized in Jerusalem ? The earlier proph- 
ets existed, and some at least of the books of the Hagiog- 

1 See Presbyterian and Reformed Review, 1893; American Journal of 
Semitic languages and Literature, Vol. xviii. pp. 188-191; Hebraica 
(1892-93), pp. 216-225, (1893-94), pp. 122-156. 

2 Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. xx. pp. 173 et seq. 

3 Since this article went to the printer, word comes to me that the Brit- 
ish Museum has recently sent to Nablus, and purchased a large number 
of desirable manuscripts from the Samaritans. 



20 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

rapha ; but was even the second of the groups of the sa- 
cred books then regarded as of equal authority with the 
L,aw? It would seem not. The second question is this : 
If we are to believe in a Hexateuch instead of a Penta- 
teuch, why have not the Samaritans the book of Joshua ? 
They could have used it admirably. Joshua was one of 
their own heroes, and made his home in their own city, 
and established on one of the mountains above it the first 
sanctuary after the settlement of the land. The Torah, 
with its five books or six, was complete, certainly by the 
time of Nehemiah (444 B.C.), and the Samaritan schism oc- 
curred in 432. Why have not the Samaritans a Hexa- 
teuch? I leave the question for others. 

The value of the Samaritan Pentateuch is considerable, 
as showing the general accuracy of the received text. Dur- 
ing all the centuries of separation, these two sects have 
preserved independently the first five books of the Bible 
without comparison, nor has either now the slightest dis- 
position to compare. Each has copied from its own cop- 
ies, and it is most remarkable that the differences are so 
slight and generally unimportant. The Septuagint is just- 
ly regarded as high textual authority ; but the Septuagint 
is later by a century or more than the Samaritan. More- 
over, the Septuagint is a translation, while the Samaritan 
is hardly more than a transliteration, or rather an indepen- 
dent preservation in an ancient but modified alphabet. Be- 
sides this, the Septuagint has often been compared with the 
Hebrew, while the Samaritan is independent. Surely this 
text is not less valuable than the Septuagint. And, while 
the men who made and used the Septuagint are long since 
dead, the men who are still making, from their ancient 
copies, modern copies of the Pentateuch in the Samaritan, 
still live and use it, and are under every possible motive, 
as their fathers were, to do their work well. Here, then, 
is opportunity to study textual criticism at first hand. 








Mb ■•■'?'* 

..■■■■ - - . '• 




FRAGMENT OF VERY ANCIENT PARCHMENT CONTAINING GENESIS 

XXVI. 2-22. 



(Possibly the very oldest in existence. Size of original parchment 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 23 

Printing is "the art preservative of all the arts" — ex- 
cept one. The art of making manuscripts from earlier 
manuscripts dies beside the printing-press. To be sure, 
Hebrew manuscripts of the Pentateuch are still made for 
use in Hebrew synagogues, but who knows that they have 
not been corrected from printed copies? But Tischen- 
dorf's discovery at Sinai was not more surely independent 
of the printer and proof-reader than the newest copy of the 
Pentateuch which may be purchased from Jacob, the priest 
of Shechem. Even if the text had no value, in compari- 
son with the Hebrew, the method by which the text is 
produced makes the student of textual criticism a contem- 
porary with the scribes of all past ages. 

It is instructive to compare the Samaritan and Hebrew 
texts as a basis for our conclusions concerning the Jewish 
means of preserving their texts. The Massoretic text has 
so obliterated all indications of individuality that we are 
left almost to conjecture for our theories of the care which 
the scribes bestowed on their work, and the liberties which 
they took with the text. The practice of the Samaritans 
will afford us an interesting insight into ancient customs; 
for their ancient and contemporary manuscripts are both 
before us, and the means of reproduction are now going 
on. Certainly the scribes intend to be accurate, and have 
at hand very ancient copies for comparison. But that they 
made mistakes is shown in my own codex, where, for in- 
stance, they misspell the very name of their holy mount- 
ain, in a passage which presently I shall quote. Although 
many errors are corrected in this roll, this glaring one, 
which spells Gerizim "Gizim," remains untouched, prob- 
ably because its very familiarity caused it to be read un- 
noticed. 

Christianity did not wait for a system of textual criti- 
cism, but took its versions of the Old Testament as the 



24 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

Jews had come to possess them. When Jerome undertook 
a new translation, he was condemned almost unreservedly ; 
even Augustine grew timid in his defense; and Jerome, in 
his replies to the bitter denunciations, flung at his accusers 
such epithets as "fools," "stupids," and "biped asses." It 
was dangerous to be a lower critic in those days. After 
Jerome had been dead a few centuries, however, men began 
to honor him and his version, and they were so well con- 
tent with the latter, that textual criticism became almost 
a lost art, and some of Jerome's references became all but 
unintelligible for something like a thousand years. 

For instance, Jerome in his comment on Galatians iii. 10 
upholds the genuineness of the Samaritan against the Mas- 
soretic text ; while, in his comment on Genesis iv. 8, he 
speaks more favorably of the Hebrew. Jerome was not 
alone in his regard for the "ancient Hebrew according to 
the Samaritan." Eusebius of Caesarea notes that it was 
written in a character more ancient than the Massoretic 
Hebrew. Origen quotes it with respect. There were 
others of the early fathers who preferred the Samaritan to 
the Hebrew, and others who quoted the Samaritan as at 
least entitled to consideration. But textual criticism in 
the Mediaeval Church practically ceased with the adoption 
of the Vulgate. For hundreds of years no scholar had 
seen a copy of the Samaritan version, and it began to be 
doubted whether such a version had ever existed. The 
attempt to revive the question in the early days of the 
Reformation, when translations were the order of the day, 
met with little popular interest. King James's Version 
was made with tacit faith in the Massoretic text, and the 
question about the Samaritan version seemed likely to 
come to nothing. 

About this time, European scholars were startled by the 
actual arrival in Paris of a copy of the Samaritan Penta- 
teuch. Then there ensued as lively and fierce a contro- 



The Samaritan Pentateuch, 25 

versy as modern biblical scholarship has ever known. Ju- 
lius Caesar Scaliger (1484-1558) is said to have called 
attention, first, to the importance of finding a copy of the 
Samaritan text, if it still existed ; and his brilliant son Jo- 
seph (1540-1609), the greatest of modern scholars, whose 
interest in textual criticism exceeded even that of his dis- 
tinguished father, attempted to procure such a manuscript 
by correspondence with the Samaritans themselves. These 
letters were answered by Samaritans in Cairo and Nablus ; 
but the answers were long on the way, and Scaliger did 
not live to receive them. He died two years before the 
completion of the King James's Version, and, though he 
visited England, he cherished a poor opinion of the schol- 
arship and courtesy of England, and died with less appre- 
ciation of his contributions to scholarship in his own age 
than has been accorded to him in later generations. 

The suggestion of the Scaligers, father and son, bore 
fruit in 1616. Pietro della Valle (1586-1652), a Roman 
nobleman, having been disappointed in love, at first con- 
templated suicide, but instead journeyed to the Holy Land. 
He tarried a year in Constantinople, where he obtained a 
commission from De Sancy, the French ambassador, to pur- 
chase Samaritan manuscripts. Having consoled himself 
by marrying a Christian Syrian woman, who proved a 
brave and helpful companion, he journeyed far. He vain- 
ly attempted to procure manuscripts in Cairo and Gaza, 
where at that time there were Samaritan colonies, and met 
with no better success at Nablus, the center of the Samar- 
itan religion. At Damascus, however, he was able to buy 
two copies of the Pentateuch, one on parchment and the 
other on paper. The latter he retained, and the former he 
sent to De Sancy, who sent it to the Library of the Ora- 
toire in Paris. The two copies were used in making the 
Paris Polyglot, and were reprinted in the London Polyglot. 

Archbishop Ussher was profoundly interested in these 



26 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

manuscripts, and began an effort to secure more. One of 
these was sent on a ship that fell into the hands of pirates ; 
but others were procured at great cost. In 1671, Robert 
Huntington, afterward Bishop of Raphoe, visited the Sa- 
maritans at Nablus. The Samaritans appear to have un- 
derstood him to represent that there were Samaritans in 
Europe, and they furnished him with a copy of their Law, 
and wrote a letter to their brethren in England. Thomas 
Marshall, Rector of Lincoln College, Oxford, answered 
this and subsequent letters, of which there were five, and 
these letters were published in 1699. 

In 1733, Benjamin Kennicott (1718-1783) issued his 
dissertation on "The State of the Printed Hebrew Text of 
the Old Testament," combatting the doctrine of the abso- 
lutely correct transmission of the Hebrew text, by a com- 
parison of 1 Chronicles xi. with 2 Samuel v. and xxiii. In 
1759 he published a second work on the same subject, 
giving a catalogue of extant Hebrew MSS. in London, Ox- 
ford, and Cambridge, and defending the Samaritan text. 
His work roused strong antagonism, but resulted in the 
contribution of ^10,000 to buy Hebrew manuscripts, so 
that six hundred and fifteen Hebrew codices were at last 
gathered and collated, and the Hebrew and Samaritan texts 
were printed in parallel columns in a work extending to 
thirty volumes. In this work he was able to use sixteen 
Samaritan manuscripts, most of them incomplete. 

It is little wonder that the controversies waxed hot over 
these documents. King James's Version was completed 
barely five years before the arrival of the first of these man- 
uscripts; was all this work to be done over? Yet it was 
not chiefly King James's Version that the conservatives of 
that day rallied to defend ; for King James's Version was 
not yet in very high favor. The real question was as to 
the validity of the sources Of textual knowledge. The 
Protestants were placing increased emphasis on the ipsis- 




PENTATEUCH AND GENESIS. 

(Purchased by the Author at Nablus.) 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 29 

sima verba of Scripture ; nothing pleased the Romanists 
more than to adduce proof that the documents from which 
this word was to be translated were themselves uncertain. 
Generally Protestants opposed the Samaritan, and Roman- 
ists favored it ; and where a Protestant scholar like Kenni- 
cott favored the new discovery he did so at his peril. With 
Kennicott and his arguments, however, we shall have fur- 
ther occasion to deal. Gradually the controversy died down. 
King James's Version won its way to popular favor. Ref- 
erences to the Samaritan became more infrequent. In 1815 
Gesenius devoted an exhaustive work to the subject, show- 
ing the general superiority of the Massoretic text, and 
since his day there has been a general disposition on the 
part of conservative scholars to ignore it altogether. 1 

It is worth noticing that here and there a voice is raised 
in protest against this indiscriminate throwing over of the 
Samaritan Pentateuch. In "The Bible and its Transmis- 
sion," Copinger, after pointing out the large number of 
agreements of the Samaritan with the LXX., and the high 
value set upon it by the early fathers, says : — 

" It is quite possible that sufficient importance is not now given to this 
version; and we venture to suggest that the reaction has been too great. 
The Samaritan Pentateuch certainly contains readings which do not 
agree with the present Hebrew text, and some of them are unquestiona- 
bly to be accounted for by its being copied from a text which differed 
from that which became fixed by the Massoretes. ' ' 

Every possible conjecture has been put forth and defend- 
ed as to the origin of the Samaritan version, and its fre- 
quent agreement with the Septuagint. The theory of Ge- 
senius, which was also favored by Moses Stuart, 2 seems 
most reasonable ; namely, that the Samaritan and the Sep- 
tuagint flowed from a common source older than either, 
and differing from the Massoretic text. It is impossible 
that such a text should be wholly lacking in value, even 

!Cf., however, the Polychrome Bible.— Kd. 
2 Biblical Repository, 1832, p. 714. 



30 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

though in general manifestly inferior to the Massoretic 
text. Where it departs from both the accepted text and 
the LXX., it may have little worth. But there are at least 
one thousand readings, most of them exceedingly trivial, 
where the LXX. differs from the Hebrew, and where it is sus- 
tained by the Samaritan. The principal variations were 
printed by Professor Bernhard Pick, in the Bibuotheca 
Sacra, 1 in a series of articles, which is really more valua- 
ble than the work of Gesenius, and for purposes of compar- 
ison leaves hardly anything to be desired. His article in 
McClintock and Strong, also, is very full and painstaking. 

Excepting in a few points where there are doctrinal dif- 
ferences between the Hebrew and Samaritan texts, the 
Samaritan version is quite as good authority as the Sep- 
tuagint, and perhaps a little better when its antiquity is 
considered. If it be alleged that the Samaritan priests 
have been inferior in education to the priests of Jerusalem, 
and that less care has been taken in copying their Scrip- 
tures, it may be answered, on the other hand, that the man- 
uscripts have, nevertheless, a striking consistency, having 
been confined to a few communities, and of late to a single 
one, in which they have been less frequently copied, and 
more frequently compared with versions of undoubted an- 
tiquity. Moreover, this singular care of the Jews for their 
manuscripts dates particularly from the time of the Mas- 
soretes; and the Samaritans have at least one manuscript 
earlier than the Massoretes. In points of doctrinal differ- 
ence between the Jews and Samaritans, the corroborative 
value ceases, but in these cases the question of which text 
is right still remains to be settled. 

There are a few minor differences between the Samari- 
tan and the Hebrew where the Samaritan agrees with the 
Septuagint, and is almost certainly right. For instance, 

iVol. xxxiii. (1876) pp. 264-287, 533-557; xxxiv. (1877) pp. 79-87; 
xxxv. (1878) pp. 76-98, 309-3 2 5- 



The Samarita?t Pentateuch. 



3i 



in Genesis iv. 8, the translation of our English Bibles, 
"And Cain told his brother," is most unlikely. The mar- 
gin of the American Revised is better, "And Cain said un- 
to his brother." But what did he say ? According to the 
Samaritan, the LXX. agreeing, he said, "L,et us go into 
the field." The circumstances at once confirm this as the 
probably correct text. Instead of telling Abel what Jeho- 
vah had said to him, Cain concealed it, and invited Abel 
into the field, where, treacherously and with premedita- 
tion, he slew him. 

Again, in Genesis xlvii. 21, it is recorded that the Egyp- 
tians came to Joseph, and offered to sell not only their 
lands, but themselves. Our translations from the Hebrew 
read, "And he removed them to the cities." But the Sa- 
maritan tells us, the Septuagint agreeing, that "he en- 
slaved them to slaves," which is probably correct, as the 
context would indicate. 

But there are three points in which there are differences 
of some importance, and in which one text or the other 
has been deliberately changed. The first of these is Gene- 
sis xxii. 2, where Abraham is commanded to sacrifice Isaac 
in "the land of Moriah." We know nothing about the 
land of Moriah, but we do know of a Mount Moriah, where 
later stood the temple in Jerusalem, and we know of a 
land of Moreh, the region about Shechem. Either the 
Jews have changed their text to Moriah to make it appear 
that the sacrifice of Isaac occurred where later their tem- 
ple stood, or the Samaritans have changed it to Moreh, 
and for the same reason, i.e. to give sacredness to their own 
region. I refer here to Dean Stanley's able treatment of 
this point, in which he seems to me to have shown, almost 
beyond the need of further discussion, that Gerizim, and 
not Jerusalem, was probably the place where Abraham of- 
fered Isaac, and also the place of Abraham's meeting with 
Melchizedek. 1 . 

1 Stanley's Sinai and Palestine, pp. 3 l6 -3!9- 



32 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

Another interesting difference is the insertion in the Sa 
maritan, after the Ten Commandments, of a passage com 
manding worship on Gerizim. It is frequently affirmed 
that, to procure the insertion of this command, the Samar 
itans have grouped the Ten Commandments into nine 
making this a tenth. But the codex before me does not 
support this view. The Ten Commandments are in three 
groups (Ex. xx. 1-7, 8-1 1, 12-17), exactly as with us, 
though, of course, not divided into verses. Immediately 
after this, and in the lesson for the same day, compiled 
from three places in Deuteronomy (xi. 29; xxvii. 2 et sea.] 
xi. 32), is the command to worship on Gerizim. 

I give herewith a reproduction of the section following 

"*> £ <$$&§&/%/&<$<&£* .M^^i^^.^^^l "3^'S <*, -aj 
- — >«; <• ,< <• ^<3 #** • ^ ^ ^ 

THE PASSAGE FOUOWING THE DECALOGUE. 

(The marks frcm middle to left end of last line indicate the end of the 

day's lesson, which begins with Ex. xx. 1.) 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 33 

the Decalogue, showing the addition, together with' a 
transliteration into Hebrew, line by line, and a transla- 
tion into English of the added passage. . For this, also, I 
am indebted to Dr. Foster. 

- PASSAGE FOUND IN 'JnE SAi>lARITAlI PEMTATtfUOH 

(Cortex lart.onii) TnuTfirtiateiy follcmn^ 
^ Sxortur- xx:17. 

Hebrew Transliteration "by ^rank H. foster, J). I). 

> i > ^ 

:• • t -. J • I- -: - t : . : T t t t - •„• -.• 

" t . * V 'T-iT - T : - T • - T T ; - t 

bto feu& W»fc s bi* hjsrtj 'o^'a'jeh-Jijji 

d^sla »$»iSi b^4i> V)^jn ^ ^^ rratto 

^ jaVitettft b^N"j b-toW pntiti 

^^ ^j^ p^f ^wf ^'^>? ^Tt *6w 

j^-rta fi^* Wje Waft ^ta rial** 

" And it shall come to pass, when Jehovah thy God shall bring thee to 
the land of the Canaanite, -whither thou goest to possess it, that thou 
shalt set thee up great stones, and plaster them with plaster. And it 
shall be, when ye pass over the Jordan, that ye shall setup these stones 
[which] I command you this day, in Mount Gizim [sic]. And thou shalt 
build there an altar to Jehovah thy God, an altar of stones. Thou shalt 



34 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 



not lift up upon them iron. With perfect stones shalt thou build the 
altar of Jehovah thy God. And thou shalt sacrifice peace-offerings, and 
thou shalt eat there, and shalt rejoice before Jehovah thy God. This 
mountain is on the other side of Jordan, behind the way of the going 
down of the sun, in the land of the Canaanites which dwell in the Ara- 
bah, over against Gilgal, beside the oak of Moreh, beside Shechem." 

It is not necessary to debate long which of these texts is 
correct here. It is safe to follow the rule to " prefer the 
shorter reading," and to treat this passage in the Samaritan 
as an interpolation in this place supplied from the parallel 
passages in Deuteronomy. But the question recurs when 
we come to a consideration of the most important of the 
differences, the question whether the memorial stones com- 
manded to be set up by Joshua were erected on Ebal or 
Gerizim. 

This passage (Deut. xxvii. 4) is that one over which the 
discussions of Kennicott's time were waged. As the whole 
story is involved in the discussion, it will be well to quote 
the introduction to the cursings and blessings : — 

14 And Moses and the elders of Israel commanded the people, saying, 
Keep all the commandment which I command you this day. And it 
shall be on the day when ye shall pass over Jordan unto the land which 
the Lord thy God giveth thee, that thou shalt set thee up great stones, 
and plaister them with plaister: and thou shalt write upon them all the 
words of this law, when thou art passed over; that thou mayest go in 
unto the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, a land flowing with 
milk and honey, as the Lord, the God of thy fathers, hath promised thee. 
And it shall be when ye are passed over Jordan, that ye shall set up 
these stones, which I command you this day, in mount Ebal, and thou 
shalt plaister them with plaister. And there shalt thou build an altar 
unto the Lord thy God, an altar of stones: thou shalt lift up no iron tool 
upon them. Thou shalt build the altar of the Lord thy God of unhewn 
stones: and thou shalt offer burnt offerings thereon unto the Lord thy 
God: and thou shalt sacrifice peace offerings, and shalt eat there; and 
thou shalt rejoice before the Lord thy God. And thou shalt write upon 
the stones all the words of this law very plainly. 

" And Moses and the priests the Levites spake unto all Israel, saying, 
Keep silence, and hearken, O Israel; this day thou art become the peo- 
ple of the Lord thy God. Thou shalt therefore obey the voice of the 
Lord thy God, and do his commandments and his statutes, which I com- 
mand thee this day. 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 35 

"And Moses charged the people the same day, saying, These shall 
stand upon mount Gerizim to bless the people, when ye are passed over 
Jordan; Simeon, and Levi, and Judah, and Issachar, and Joseph, and 
Benjamin: and these shall stand upon mount Bbal for the curse; Reu- 
ben, Gad, and Asher, and Zebulun, Dan, and Naphtali. And the In- 
vites shall answer, and say unto all the men of Israel with a loud voice, 

" Cursed be the man that maketh a graven or molten image, an abom- 
ination unto the Lord, the work of the hands of the craftsman, and set- 
teth it up in secret. And all the people shall answer and say, Amen." 
(Deut. xxvii. 1-15.) 

This is not a question which can be settled by the al- 
leged superiority of the Massoretic text. One whole group 
of manuscripts, the Hebrew, agrees that the stones were set 
up on Bbal ; the other entire group that they were erected 
on Gerizim. Both sets of scribes intended to be accurate 
in general; neither was above the possibility of mistake or 
even of intentional change to prove a point. A familiar 
instance is Judges xviii. 30, where the Jewish scribes have 
changed "Moses" to "Manasseh." Desiring to free the 
grandson of Moses from the opprobrium of being the first 
idolater, and also at the same time to give a gratuitous 
fling at the Samaritans, they had inserted a nun, and 
changed Moses to Manasseh, as it abides to this day. If 
the Jews were not too good to make such a change for a 
trivial advantage, they can hardly have been too good to 
have changed the passage in Deuteronomy when the ques- 
tion of the priority of their places of worship was involved. 

Robertson Smith, and the modern critics generally, 
agree with the conservatives of Kennicott's day in support 
of the Massoretic reading. Robertson Smith in the Bri- 
tannica thinks the Samaritan reading "glaringly unhistor- 
ical." The reason, of course, why the unnamed sanctuary 
in Deuteronomy cannot, in his thought, be Gerizim, and 
must be Jerusalem, is that, when Deuteronomy was pro- 
mulgated in 621, Jerusalem was an established fact. But, 
in that case, why did not the Jews write up Deuteronomy 
to the facts as they were, and save all chance of a dispute? 



36 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

And, when the Samaritans had choice of two mountains 
for their temple, why did they choose the one which would 
require them to change the text of the L,aw which they al- 
ready had? 

The arguments of real value on this point are found in 
the incidental allusions in the account of the setting up of 
the stones on either Gerizim or Bbal. . I cannot agree that 
any one has answered Kennicott in his study of these. 
Omitting some trivial arguments, he sustains the conten- 
tion that the memorial stones erected after the passing of 
Jordan were upon Gerizim, as the Samaritans claim, by 
these proofs, which I have adapted somewhat to the argu- 
ment as it now might stand : — 

1. That Gerizim was the mountain of blessings, and 
altogether more sacred in its associations than Kbal. It is 
quite unlikely that the altar would be erected on the mount 
of cursing. 

2. That the Samaritans, building their new temple, 
the rival of that in Jerusalem, would gladly place it in a 
spot known to be sacred, even as Jeroboam erected his calf 
at Bethel, because of its ancient and recognized sanctity. 
Political considerations, as well as religious, would have 
determined this choice by Sanballat and Manasseh. 

3. That, as seen from Shechem, Bbal is parched and 
barren, while Gerizim's more verdant, fruitful, and beauti- 
ful side is toward the city ; so that in all times Gerizim 
must have had the more pleasant associations in the city, 
the valley, and among the people who passed through the 
gateway between the two great hills. 

4. That Jotham chose Gerizim as the pulpit for his par- 
able, probably because it was already a sacred spot. 

5. That probably Gerizim was the traditional spot of 
the offering of Isaac. 

Omitting some proofs which do not seem to me import 
tant, Kennicott went on to show : — 




THE HIGH PRIEST JACOB, AND THE HOI,Y SCROTI, OF NABUJS. 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 39 

6. That Joshua's own tribe, Ephraim, the tribe whose 
capital Shechem was, was stationed upon Gerizim, at the 
time of the dedication of the memorial stones, and that 
Joshua would certainly have been with his tribe near the 
stones that were being dedicated. 

7. That the stones were to be used as soon as set up for 
sacrifice; who were to offer the sacrifices on Ebal? Were 
sacrifices to be offered by Reuben, or Gad, or Asher, or 
Zebulun, or Dan, or Naphtali? For these were on Ebal. 
The great tribes were on Gerizim ; and there were sta- 
tioned the Levites, who only had the right to offer sacrifice. 
It is absurd to suppose that the altar was erected on the 
mountain where no one could use it. 

Kennicott's conclusion is strong, and to my mind thor- 
oughly convincing. I give it in all the emphasis of the 
original type : — 

'■' And shall we then refuse to allow that the Altar and the Law were 
placed on the mount of Blessings— on the same mount with Joshua, the 
heroic leader of the people— on the same mount with their glory, the 
tribe of Judah — and on the same mount with the tribe of Levi, who 
were the proper and divinely appointed, the only Ministers at that very 
altar? Will there be the least presumption in supposing the reader to 
be now persuaded that this corruption has been hitherto charged upon 
the innocent instead of the guilty ? Certainly, if there is not here detn - 
onstration, there is at least strong probability— that GERIZIM, thus con- 
fessed to have been the mount of BLESSINGS and the station of the tribe 
of LEVI, was the mount which was to be, and which was, honored with 
the Altar and the Laiv. And if the reader be convinced, that the Sa- 
maritans have not corrupted their Pentateuch in this celebrated arti- 
cle, he must be convinced that THE Jews have corrupted it, and cor- 
rupted not only this text in their Pentateuch, but also the corresponding 
text in Joshua." 1 

It seems to me that we cannot account for the history of 
Israel without believing that the command to establish a 
central sanctuary, so often repeated in Deuteronomy, 2 is 

1 Dissertation the Second on the Printed Hebrew Text, Oxford, 1759, 

PP- 75-76. 

2 Deut. xii. 5-21; xiv. 23; xv. 19-20; xvi. 11; xxvi. 2, etc. In none of 
these passages is the place named. 



40 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

much older than 621 B.C. Whatever maybe true of the 
completed book of Deuteronomy, this part of it, which is 
the central part in the argument that brings the book down 
to the time of Josiah, must have been much older. And 
it is remarkably significant that in all these the sanctuary 
is unnamed. The conviction has grown upon me in this 
study that the Jews possessed this command in some form 
essentially like that in Deuteronomy long before Josiah's 
day, and before the rise of Jerusalem. 

But if the Jews had such a command for the establish- 
ment of a central sanctuary, did they obey it? Not at Je- 
rusalem, certainly. Nor yet at Shiloh, though there the 
ark abode. If they established any central sanctuary, it 
was at Shechem, and the ceremony of dedication is that 
outlined in the passage already quoted at length, in the 
setting up of the stones, probably on Gerizim, which name 
the Jews long afterward changed to Bbal, for the supposed 
honor of their own later sanctuary at Jerusalem. 

It seems to me altogether probable that, at the time of 
the settlement of Palestine, Shechem was the logical cap- 
ital, and probably the place intended as the nation's sanc- 
tuary. Situated midway between Dan and Beersheba and 
between the Jordan and the sea, the place to which Abra- 
ham had directed his steps, and the traditional scene of 
the meeting with Melchizedek and of the offering of Isaac ; 
the home of Jacob ; the place toward which for forty years 
the nation had borne the body of Joseph, — it was admira- 
bly fitted to be the national capital and sanctuary. There 
Joshua established his home ; there at the beginning he 
caused the Law to be ratified ; there he erected the memor- 
ial and altar; there he convened the tribes in solemn as- 
sembly. But the coming to the throne of a king from 
Judah, with the long strife between David and the house 
of Saul, made Judah the stronghold of the new dynasty ; 
the capture of the Jebusite fortress after a taunting threat 



The Samaritan Pentateuch. 41 

gave David occasion to occupy it, first as a fort, then as a 
capital, and finally as a sanctuary. Thither, in a time 
when worship had declined, and the ark was neglected, 
he removed that sacred relic from its northern home. The 
first attempt ended disastrously, and David waited long be- 
fore repeating it. But at last the ark was removed, though 
the plan of erecting a permanent temple was not accom- 
plished in his day. The whole narrative sustains the im- 
pression that no time-honored tradition at that time marked 
Jerusalem as the central place of worship, and raises the 
question whether the death of Uzzah was not interpreted 
as a national rebuke for the removal of the ark to adorn 
the made-to-order capital of the new military dynasty. 
But, the ark once there, the center of worship was definite- 
ly established. 

The building of the temple in the same isolated and 
sterile town by Solomon gave the movement new power ; 
and the destruction of the outlying shrines by Hezekiah 
and still more by Josiah, completed what was begun by 
David. Jerusalem and Judah were established at the ex- 
pense of Shechem and Ephraim, and the burden of taxa- 
tion under Solomon fell heavy on the other tribes, that Ju- 
dah might escape. 1 The nation grew wider with prosper- 
ity, but the king's thought limited the real kingdom to 
Judah, and at last came the inevitable rending apart of Ju- 
dah and Israel. Judah with its provincial capital stood 
alone against the real and greater Israel. 

If Shechem had been the national capital, with all its 
sacred associations, dear to all the tribes, and central to 
them ; if the ark had found its abiding-place on Gerizim , 
instead of in the city which David captured from the Jeb- 
usites, and which had no sacred past so far as we know; if 
Judah had been less arrogant and haughty, and the kings 

1 Solomon seems to have exempted Judah from annual tribute, the bur- 
den falling on the other tribes (1 Kings iv. 7-19). 



42 The Samaritan Pentateuch. 

had favored it less at the expense of the other tribes, as 
must have been the case had the capital been in Bphraim ; 
if the nation had centered about a city built not on an un- 
watered hill, but in the most fertile valley in the land, 
and flanked by noble mountains rising above it for defense, 
would there have been the disruption, rivalry, bad states- 
manship, and overthrow which the Bible records? What 
if the Samaritan Pentateuch had been followed ? 

THE SAMARITAN ALPHABET. 

(As written by the High Priest.) 



